Researcher profile

T. Meißner

T. Meißner contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 11 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
1works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Quantitative Comparison of Planar Coded Aperture Imaging Reconstruction Methods

Imaging distributions of radioactive sources plays a substantial role in nuclear medicine as well as in monitoring nuclear waste and its deposit. Coded Aperture Imaging has been proposed as an alternative to parallel or pinhole collimators, but requires image reconstruction as an extra step. Multiple reconstruction methods with varying run time and computational complexity have been proposed. Yet, no quantitative comparison between the different reconstruction methods has been carried out so far. This paper focuses on a comparison based on three sets of hot-rod phantom images captured with an experimental Gamma-camera consisting of a Tungsten-based MURA mask with a 2mm thick 256x256 pixelated CdTe semiconductor detector coupled to a Timepix readout circuit. Analytical reconstruction methods, MURA Decoding, Wiener Filter and a convolutional Maximum Likelihood Expectation Maximization (MLEM) algorithm were compared to data-driven Convolutional Encoder-Decoder (CED) approaches. The comparison is based on the contrast-to-noise ratio as it has been previously used to assess reconstruction quality. For the given set-up, MURA Decoding, the most commonly used CAI reconstruction method, provides robust reconstructions despite the assumption of a linear model. For single image reconstruction, however, MLEM performed best among analytical reconstruction methods, but took the longest with an average of 13s run time. The fastest reconstruction method is the Wiener Filter with 67ms and mediocre quality. The CED with a specifically tailored training set was able to succeed the most commonly used MURA decoding on average by a factor between 1.37 and 2.60 and a run time of around 300ms.